Talk:Sesame Street Pitch Reel
Body Parts vs. Heavy Equipment How could Body Parts vs. Heavy Equipment be included in the 1968 pitch reel when, according to Henson's journals, it was shot in January 1969? :Turns out we were wrong about it being from 1968. Sesame Street: A Celebration - 40 Years of Life on the Street shows a brief image from Jim Henson's journal (presumably the red book) which says that the pitch reel was filmed on January 22, 1969. I wonder what the original "source" was for 1968. --Minor muppetz 03:41, January 5, 2011 (UTC) ::I found what the original source was for 1968, which does appear to have been a mistake. Seeing part of a journal entry that appears to have been noted on the day filming began is more reliable. --Minor muppetz 04:19, January 5, 2011 (UTC) Two Versions How do we know that there were two versions filmed, with the ending where Rowlf chose a title and Joan Ganz Cooney's scenes being filmed later? Does anybody know if the original version had any scenes not used in the second version? --Minor muppetz 03:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC) :Some contributors have seen copies of a version which doesn't have material seen in the version on Old School. My question is, how do we know that the part with Kermit suggesting the name Sesame Street wasn't filmed at the same time as the other Rowlf and Kermit parts? The material looks like they were from the same shoot. There's no evidence that the shorter version (being called here the earliest of two versions) wasn't just an edited down version sent out separate from the longer version. — Scott (talk) 18:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC) ::Actually, there is. Lesser and others suggest that when the pitch reel was first released, the name hadn't been chosen yet. I think Sesame Street and the Reform of Children's Television and others indicate it too. They probably weren't that far apart, but there's enough evidence to suggest that it's not simply that "Sesame Street" was utterly omitted from the "earlier" version. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 18:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC) :::Here's what Lesser says, in Children and Television: Lessons from Sesame Street (and with a caveat that on occasion, like analyzing John-John's counting exercise, his memory lapsed as to which number involved the pause, but for myself, with something like this, I'm very much inclined to take his word on it): "Every television series needs a name, but as we approached the beginning of broadcasting in the fall of 1969, we still did not have one. In a preview film we produced to bring the series to the attention of station managers, parents and teachers, David Connell decided to admit our difficulties in finding a name in a Muppet parody of our show-naming conference." -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC) ::::Nicely done, sir. That settles that. — Scott (talk) 01:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC) :::::Thank you. But since I already had it all typed out, here's what it says in Robert W. Morrow's Sesame Street and the Reform of Children's Television: "By February 1969, Executive Producer had received from cartoon and film contractors their first finished pieces, and he asked the head writer, Jon Stone, to create a promotional film for the show. The Children's Television Workshop needed a half-hour introduction to Sesame Street that could be shown to the NET station representatives. But there was a problem: the show still did not have a title - a situation that had become a joke within the workshop. When Stone wrote the script for the film, he made the lack of a title the central gag." And here's the skinny on the "second" version. "Once they settled on the title, the producers returned to the studio and appened to the promotional film a closing Muppet scene in which Kermit - Jim Henson's oldest puppet and his alter ego -- suggests Sesame Street." And Morrow's sources cite the scripts and storyboard and correspondance from Jon Stone, and other CTW archives stuff, and that the first "Sesame Street Pitch Film" (dated 1968! apparently, so either it was mislabeled or impeccable sourcing aside, Morrow goofed on a date earlier, but it specified "No Joan Cooney Intro/Naming Segment.") All of this taken together seems to support the idea of two versions; I wish we could get a better idea of exactly how much time lapsed between the two, but clearly the Cooney/name stuff were indeed add-ons. Maybe at some point when one or more of us can make it to Maryland and riff through the archives ourselves, we can clear that up. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC) Beautiful Day Monster It says that Beautiful Day made an appearance on the Pitch Reel. Can anyone clear that one up for me? -- Fuzzyface32 1:37, 07, November 2006 (UTC) :It's on Old School: Volume 1 — Scott (talk) 18:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC) :what version is he? is he the Ed Sullivan Version or the Sesame Street Version.--Fuzzyface32 1:48, 08, November 2006 The two and two are (ain't) five Show Does anyone know what scene this is in? Scoop comes up with the Title "The two and two are five show, but Grump Corrects him that 2 plus 2 doesn't make 5 so Scoop changes it to "The two and two ain't five show.-- Fuzzyface32 1:43, 08 November 2006